connihur-blog

[connihur-blog]

Gentrified Graffiti: The Los Angeles Arts District

I have always been interested in traditional forms of art - oil and acrylic paintings, sculptures, triptychs. But after learning about graffiti and street art in class this semester, they become a recent muse. This is because graffiti to me seems very dichotomous, which makes it unique; it can be both high art and low art, public and private, self-serving yet anonymous.

Last summer, I was visiting Okinawa, one of Japan’s islands that is home to a lot of traditional temples and historical artifacts. While walking down the street filled with what looked like authentic and traditional restaurants, I came upon a narrow space in between two of the building that was almost entirely covered in graffiti. It gave me such a weird and alarming feeling that I had to pause and take a picture. It was so out of place yet also very seamlessly blended into the street.  

I did not know much about the history of graffiti or the significance of graffiti in Japan (or anywhere else) until I started reading about it and learning about why graffiti made me feel such a way that compelled me to take a picture. It was because the graffiti was positioned in a location - a street with many traditional restaurants. It was unexpected, which made it feel almost intrusive. However, it also felt okay to admire and preserve it there because it was in a small alleyway that most people might miss. All of these feelings were rooted from the preconceived notion, an untrue concept mostly learned from media, that graffiti is essentially bad: an illegal product of outliers.

In Los Angeles, murals have become an incredibly popular marketing tool. Murals can also be seen as a form of graffiti, for it is painting and tagging public space. However, much like the enthusiasm that was received with yarn bombing in New York, murals have become highly popular. It has become the “solution” to cleaning up graffiti. Though murals are an appropriation of graffiti and black culture, artists who paint these murals are often times commissioned by business owners or even public officials to paint over certain parts of the city. Therefore, the trend I picked up in the foreign island of Okinawa, where graffiti is only seen in areas where it receives minimal attraction, has also become applicable in Los Angeles. 

As seen in the photos below, graffiti is mainly seen in areas that are not meant to be attracted by many people: parking lots, bathroom stalls, street poles, gates, and freeway dividers. 

I found this empty parking [the two photos above] on the outskirts of the arts district, full of graffiti.

Another empty parking lot, and what looks like a dumpster or shed is covered in graffiti. 

However, the parking lot below that was open for what looked like a restaurant at the end, was covered in murals. Even the cars that were parked in this parking lot that was 5 minutes away from the lots above showed a different type of status symbol.

However, what I also noticed while I was taking these photos on my phone was that the filters used in snapchat, as seen below, was one that appropriated graffiti. This was extremely ironic for Snapchat to have this tag available in the arts district, an area that mainly worshipped murals more than graffiti. 

The photo above shows the Snapchat filter that is being used for the Artist District. I put it over a commercial building that showed a well-established mural over it, with the sign no parking. 

This photo above also uses the same snapchat filter over what is seen as traditional graffiti. It mimics the filter’s design. But instead of a private and well-established building, the graffiti is seen over a porta-potty that was being used by construction workers right next to the highly gentrified area of Urth Cafe. 

The photos below show how poles seem to be a popular spot for graffiti artists - maybe because most if not all of the walls in the arts district are covered in murals, leaving no space for the graffiti artists who used to tag all over the area before it became commercialized. 

As well as street dividers, and sidewalks - as seen in the photos below. 

An obscurely covered-up side of the wall that has been tagged with graffiti.

A barren sidewalk on the outskirts of downtown Los Angeles, also tagged with graffiti. 

A dumpster, in the arts district, seen with graffiti

Graffiti is seen on the sidewalk, it is slowly fading away. 

The photos below, however, show that murals are only seen in extremely visible locations that are meant to attract people. People are seen taking photos with these murals. I personally know friends who purposefully visit the Arts District to take pictures with these murals, but never with graffiti. 

This mural above was painted on the same building as the popular Urth Cafe. 

A common factor about murals is that you can often times see the number/location of the building. The one above shows that it is building #440. 

This mural is painted over #1135

This mural, if seen closely, is painted over the building #436

This wings mural is extremely popular in the Arts District; it has become almost symbolic. 

The photos below, very distinctly show that the owner of this building painted over existing graffiti. 

There is definitely a huge discrepancy between the way people are perceiving graffiti and murals in downtown Los Angeles. Though most people, Snapchat included, acknowledge that graffiti is the original source for murals and the Arts District, graffiti’s are seen in only obscure locations shy from the public eye, while murals are visibly painted over commercial buildings. 

Just like Okinawa, it has become rare and almost out of place for graffiti to co-exist in Los Angeles where murals have become the focal point of street art in the city. This can mostly be attributed to the commercialization and gentrification of the area: pushing original works of graffiti to the outskirts of the district, and instead of covering existing graffiti with murals. This may only add to the stereotype that graffiti is an unwelcoming and illegal form of art. 

[connihur-blog]

Race and Graffiti

Living in Los Angeles, looking at graffiti has become almost a natural part of my daily commute to work or school. There is nothing particularly unique or emotional about the scribbles made on the walls of Koreatown or pavements of downtown Los Angeles. The only thought that comes into my head is that “ah, someone, at some point in time, came here to make their mark.” When I see graffiti in crazy locations like billboards on highways, the first thing I think of is “how the hell did they get up there?!” Maybe it’s the overabundance and commercialization of graffiti that has brought me to this naturalized reaction to graffiti.

Graffiti was never heavily criticized until the 1970’s when the anti-graffiti alliance under the government was formed. They thought of graffiti as “an attempt by insignificant people to impose their identity on others” (Austin, 2001, p.81). Before the 1970’s, not many people had such negative views about graffiti, there was “little reason for casual observers or for maintenance workers to reconsider their usual ways of understanding what they saw” (Austin, 2001, p.79). This was until the media started to put attention into how graffiti was becoming an inconvenience and that it was a sign of “political temper” in the city (Austin, 2001, p.82).

New York’s City Council president, Sanford D. Garelik, was the one who started a “War on Graffiti” where it would be illegal to carry spray paint cans by a “fine of $100, six months in jail, or both” (Austin, 2001, p.84). This was mainly because he believed that graffiti was related to crime rates for “children and young adults would think that they can get away with defacing property… feeling they can get away with more” (Austin, 2001, p.89). Therefore, as seen in the photo below, people started to agree with the antigraffiti movement, erasing graffiti off of the streets. 

[Source: https://www.cslsilicones.com/en/explore-by-sector/building-construction/item/spray-grade-anti-graffiti-protective-coating.html[

This is extremely polar in the opinion that the public and government has had on yarn bombing - also considered a type of graffiti for it is people making their mark on publicly owned spaces. Yarn bombing, contrary to paint graffiti, was met with enthusiasm by the public. The biggest reason is that yarn bombing, as seen in the photo below, is curated by the “aesthetics of suburban whiteness” by mainly white people who want to leave a mark or comment on the cold urban nature of the city.

[Resource: http://twistedsifter.com/2016/07/yarnbombing-stockholm-with-julia-riordan/]

However, yarn bombing has many problems pertaining to the radicalization of graffiti. It not only “demeans paint graffiti as a criminal act largely performed by racially marked bodies” but also exists as a form of black culture and paint graffiti appropriation (Hahner & Varda, 2014, p.312). While yarn bombing is accepted with positive reactions from the public, paint graffiti has been heavily compared as nothing more than “an illegal eyesore whose practitioners are identified with urban crime” (Hahner & Varda, 2014, p.312). The problem with these criticisms is that yarn bombing is as illegal as paint graffiti, one of the yarn bombers expressed that: “I like how I can do something illegal and still get away with it.” (Hahner & Varda, 2014, p.313). For white, middle-class yarn bombers, they are able to “practice freely their illegal art absent fear of prosecution.”

If the city issued a fine for carrying spray paint cans, and even a sentence to jail, shouldn’t yarn bombers be issued one as well? Shouldn’t the city be concerned with yarn bombers “feeling like they can get away with more” illegal activities? There is most definitely a racial difference between how paint graffiti and yarn bombing is being treated today. We just don’t admit it. 

Reference

Joe Austin, “Writing “Graffiti” in the Public Sphere: The Construction of Writing as an Urban Problem” in Taking the Train: How Graffiti Became an Urban Crisis in New York City (pp. 75-106).

Leslie A. Hahner & Scott J. Varda (2014). “Yarn Bombing and the Aesthetics of Exceptionalism” in Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies 11(4), pp. 301-321.

[connihur-blog]

Advertisements and Happiness

Advertisements are everywhere; in places we expect them to be and in places we don’t, and it is easy to quickly dismiss an ad when we see one. When advertisements with a diamond ring or musky cowboys smoking a cigarette are shown, the social meaning that is ingrained in the advertisement is often unconsciously processed and learned. We do not make an effort to actively decode and reflect upon the connotative meaning of an advertisement, or question the validity of these advertisements. This is why Sut Jhally (2003) states that advertisements play a significant role in understanding not only the meaning of the product and ourselves but also our position in relation to society.

It is mind-blowing how accustomed we are to consumer culture, billboards, and flashy advertisements. Watching football or baseball and seeing more advertisements than players on the field is not unusual. Similarly, advertisements in New York’s Times Square or Las Vegas’s Strip are heavily romanticized. Just like we talked about it in class, something would feel off and weird if New York were to take down all of the commercial advertisements on Times Square. I was curious and looked for images of Times Square in it’s earliest forms. The photo below is a picture of Times Square in the 1930’s and though it is vastly different to what Times Square looks like today, the photo still shows signs of advertisements by Camel and Pepsi. Looking at those advertisements on the street is somewhat reassuring, for I cannot imagine the street being completely void of any advertisements. I think this is very telling of the relationship our society, at least in the United States, has with consumer culture and capitalism.  

[Source: http://www.vintag.es/2016/05/times-square-in-1930s.html]

And this is exactly why we as consumers should be wary and conscious of the amount of power advertising and popular culture can have over our sense of self. Jhally mentions how “personal autonomy and control of one's life, self-esteem, a happy family life, loving relations, relaxed, tension-free leisure time, and good friendships” is what really determines our happiness (p.79). However, contrary to those values, advertisements use material goods to represent what happiness truly is. They show that the market is the place where one will be able to physically purchase certain values in life such as happiness, fraternity, security, power, and more. 

The scope in which advertisements have an impact in our lives is extremely large - advertisements are what people see to determine what it means to be masculine or feminine; rich or poor; presidential or unpresidential. The photos below depict how sexist advertisements have been (the advertisement with the shoe is from the 1950’s) and still are (the suit advertisement is from post-2010); these advertisements exemplify that there is a certain power dynamic between men and women. The danger of these advertisements is that the values they portray are then learned and practiced by the consumers.

[Source: http://www.businessinsider.com/sexist-vintage-ads-2015-9/#how-does-mad-men-compare-to-reality-27]

[Source: https://babe.net/2017/02/01/small-collection-modern-sexist-ads-will-make-feel-like-youre-living-timewarp-668]

All in all, we as consumers will never be able to escape the flooding of advertisements. However, we can be conscious of what we want to take away from these advertisements and decide whether we want to buy into what the producers of these advertisements want us to believe is “happiness.”

Reference

Sut Jhally, “Image-based Culture: Advertising and Popular Culture” in Gender, Race and Class in Media (pp. 77-87).

[connihur-blog]

Digital Branding of Our Bodies

Undoubtedly, the rise in technology has made a positive contribution to our lives in many aspects - including but not limited to health, education, entertainment, and more. However, it seems that the efficiency of technology has at times clouded our judgment when it comes to personal information, privacy, and surveillance. Simone Browne (2015), in her paper “B®anding Blackness: Biometric Technology and the Surveillance of Blackness,” expresses her concern for how people today blindly decide to be identified by digital technologies.

In Browne’s (2015) article, the history of branding is explained through the literal branding through hot irons on slaves in order to classify them accordingly; that this action was a “violent theft of the body” since the slaves were no longer identified as individuals but material goods owned by a specific owner (p.93). The entire system was dehumanizing, racist, and sexist. Not only were the slaves physically branded through hot irons, but also classified through specific body parts. Browne (2015) gives an example of an excerpt from an English ethnographer in Jamaica who would write that “no people in the world have finer teeth than the native Blacks of Jamaica” (p.95). This was common amongst ethnographers or traders in different regions who would detail specific physical and mental qualities of different ethnicities.

One interesting concept from Browne’s (2015) paper her connection to historical “epidermalization” during the slave trade and digital surveillance of the 21st Century. She uses the term epidermalization from another paper written by Stuart Hall who defines it as “literally the inscription of race on the skin.” How people of color would continue to be “dissected, fixed, and imprisoned by the white gaze” (p.97). She takes this concept and modernizes it into "digital epidermalization”. Digital epidermalization is more common than we think it is - when we go through airport security and when we scan our fingerprints to unlock our phones just like the photo below are some examples that most people today in modernized countries experience.

[Source: https://www.imore.com/how-touch-id-works]

These biometric systems, however, are epidermalized for not only do they seem to prefer whiteness and lightness in skin tones, they also have different algorithms set for different ethnicities and genders. For example, Browne (2015) notes that a biometric finger scanner had specific notes on what the fingerprints of different ethnicities looked like; whereas white users were considered the “prototype”, “users of Pacific Rim/Asian descent may have faint fingerprint ridges-especially female users” (p.113). These specific, racial, categorizations result in a modern-day epidermalization of people of color. They further call to question how “non-binary, gender nonconforming, mixed-race, intersexed, or trans people fit into this algorithmic equation” (Browne, 2015, p.114).

Another aspect that is interesting about these biometric systems is that we as individuals do not even know for sure what our fingerprints or irises look like. The photo below is the way the new Samsung Galaxy phone uses an algorithm to scan the user's iris in order to unlock the phone. The phone will thus have more detailed information about our own bodies than we ourselves do. Therefore, these technologies may seem “cool” and efficient, they are also at the same time dehumanizing. We as humans are being understood by codes and algorithms, analyzed and categorized - a metaphorical and technological branding of our bodies. It will be interesting to see if the public will ever rise up to resist the use of such biometric technologies. 

[Source: https://www.phonearena.com/news/Here-is-how-the-Galaxy-Note-7-iris-scanner-works_id82854]

Reference

Simone Browne (2015). “B®anding Blackness: Biometric Technology and the Surveillance of Blackness” inDark Matters: On the Surveillance of Blackness (pp. 89-129).

[connihur-blog]

Urban Segregation and the Fate of Compton

I had no idea that Compton was once an entirely white, middle-upper class, suburban neighborhood like “the fabled American suburb of the 1950’s” (Sides, 2004, p.588). That just 40 years ago, Compton was a symbol of hope and prosperity for African Americans in Los Angeles. The fact that I have never heard about this part of Compton’s history until I read Josh Sides (2004) essay “Straight Into Compton: American Dreams, Urban Nightmares, and the Metamorphosis of a Black Suburb” inexplicably shocked me. How is it that people today immediately think and believe that Compton is the way it is entirely due to violent black gangs and their drug use? Since when did the narrative of white flight and white gangs completely escape the minds of the average American? The fact that the current image of Compton rose specifically due to the discriminatory and racist real estate policies set by white people, as Lilian Knorr (2016) explains in her paper “Divided Landscape: The Visual Culture of Urban Segregation,” is truly mind-blowing and telling of the inherent racism that is present in America.

However, Compton’s story is not unique. Knorr (2016) points out that urban segregation was the root cause of all of Black poverty in the United States. This is because residential segregation subsequently leads to educational, occupational, and overall systematic racism against African Americans. It facilitated financial inequity, for realtors would either completely negate black customers or charge inflated prices “that were marked up 85% from the fair market value determined by the Federal Housing Administration” (Knorr, 2016, p.112). Therefore, Black residents had no choice but to move into overcrowded slums that were also overpriced. This made it almost impossible for Black families to save up and move out of the slums.

Conditions like these are what instigated the Johnson family to fight for land and housing in areas like Compton during the 1950’s. Sides (2004) explains how “African Americans, who represented less than 5 percent of Compton’s population in 1950, represented 40 percent of its population by 1960” (p.588). However, the white neighbors in the area were afraid that the surge of African Americans into the city would depreciate the cost of their homes, resulting in a “white flight” where most if not all white families and businesses started to move out of Compton. This left a void of taxes that no longer supported the city’s infrastructure, education, jobs, and more. White residents did not leave because black neighbors were rowdy or violent - in fact, Sides notes that white neighbors “acknowledged that the new black neighbors are stable” and “of a good class” and that they “wouldn’t exchange Compton for any other place” (p.588). It was, however, pure discomfort or simply said, racism, that motivated white residents to pack up their belongings and leave Compton.

In light of learning about the true history and reality of Compton and urban segregation, I have decided to further investigate the history of urban segregation in Los Angeles. The two images below show the redlining of Los Angeles in 1939 by the Home Owners Loan Corporation (HOLC). Redlining was used both privately and federally to determine whether certain communities could take out loans and mortgages or not. Green zones consisted of homogeneous white populations and Red zones consisted mostly of minority populations such as African Americans, Hispanic/Latinos, or Asian Americans. The closer the area was to the color red, the less likely residents in that area were able to issue mortgages to move into better homes. Therefore, homes in the red zones inevitably became devalued for they were not being maintained or renovated, falling into a cycle where the rich (white Americans/immigrants) were getting richer and the poor (people of color) were getting poorer.

[Source: https://www.kcet.org/shows/lost-la/segregation-in-the-city-of-angels-a-1939-map-of-housing-inequality-in-la]

It is incredible how influential the government was in keeping Los Angeles a segregated city and perpetuating the violently dramatized image of Compton instead of rectifying it. I know that the gubernatorial election for California is coming up next year - I really hope that California elects a Governor who will help restore the disenfranchised cities of Los Angeles.

References

Lilian Knorr (2016). “Divided Landscape: The Visual Culture of Urban Segregation” in Landscape Journal 35(1), pp. 109-125.

Josh Sides (2004). “Straight Into Compton: American Dreams, Urban Nightmares, and the Metamorphosis of a Black Suburb” in American Studies 56(3), pp. 583-605.

[connihur-blog]

Miyazaki the Trailblazer

I have a very soft spot for Studio Ghibli films, for they pretty much sum up my childhood. If I were to name one specific memory that brings about nostalgia, it would be watching Hayao Miyazaki’s films on VHS tapes all summer-long in the comfort of my own home. Specifically, my mom and I would always reach for the movie Kiki’s Delivery Service. I remember movies like Spirited Away and Princess Mononoke would frighten me at times (I got scared very easily), but Kiki, her cute cat Jiji, and the scenic town by the ocean were incredibly comforting.  

[Kiki and her cat Jiji flying over to a new town to practice Kiki’s witch training]

However, it was only in college when my friends and I would watch Studio Ghibli films for fun that I realized the deeper meaning behind Miyazaki’s creations. If his films were simply sources of pure entertainment as a child, they now also have a factor of enlightenment. For example, I never noticed that most of Miyazaki’s films have strong female protagonists who face certain challenges and come out as even stronger individuals. Though Miyazaki is often referred to as the Japanese Walt Disney, I don't’ think that title does him justice for his female characters do not have stereotypically feminine characteristics and are never saved by a prince charming. This blurring of certain gender stereotypes and challenging of the dominant, profitable, Western, Disney-esqe narrative at the time was truly remarkable.

This is comparable to how Hiroshi Yamanaka (2008), in his paper “The Utopian “Power to Live: The Significance of the Miyazaki Phenomenon,” points out that Miyazaki’s storyline is unique to that of the commonly popular American stories such as Robinson Crusoe, where a “rational person can pull himself up by his bootstraps” and “achieve independence and salvation solely through individual self-effort” (p. 244). There is a huge contrast between the men who save themselves by “self-effort” and Miyakazi’s young girls who discover themselves and their surroundings through the collective help of others.

[Kamaji, one of Chihiro’s kind friends who help her throughout her stay at the bathhouse]

After watching Spirited Away for class, I was compelled to rewatch Kiki’s Delivery Service and noticed that Miyazaki’s community-focused coming-of-age narrative is evident in both films. Though their circumstances and very different - Chihiro unwillingly lands in the spiritual world and the bathhouse, whereas Kiki willingly departs her family to complete her witch training - Chihiro and Kiki are both accompanied by friendly strangers who help them throughout their stay in a foreign place where their parents and friends are not present. Yamanaka (2008) also points out how they are “able to become increasingly independent because of the care and kindness shown” by others, unlike Daniel Defoe’s famous coming-of-age character Robinson Crusoe who faces all of his challenges mostly by himself. I think it is interesting how this is a reflection of the cultural difference between Asia and America; while the United States emphasizes individualism, most Asian countries put a strong importance on collectivism. Neither of those views is right or wrong, but in a country where the “pull yourself up by your bootstraps” storylines are overwhelmingly saturated in the entertainment industry, it is refreshing to see Miyazaki’s collectivist-based storylines be popularly watched and consumed internationally.  

Overall, Miyazaki’s films are unconventional in multiple ways - he is truly a trailblazer in the film industry. However, as a young female Asian girl growing up in the United States, Miyazaki showed me that young girls like myself could make a difference in the world and that it is okay to rely on others for help to do so. And for that, I am extremely grateful for his contributions and look forward to his next masterpiece.

Reference

Hiroshi Yamanaka (2008). “The Utopian “Power to Live: The Significance of the Miyazaki Phenomenon” in Japanese Visual Culture: Explorations in the World of Manga and Anime (pp. 237-255).

[connihur-blog]

Hollywood: Behind the Scenes

It is not an understatement to say that Hollywood would not be what it is today if it weren’t for Harvey Weinstein and his talents as a director - churning out more than three hundred Oscar nominations on movies he helped produce.

The Man & His Power

As the founder of the Weinstein Company and Miramax, Harvey Weinstein has held a significant amount of power over people who dreamed of making it in the entertainment and film industry. To work with him meant that you were on the pathway to success; consequently, he brought fame to numerous actors and actresses who are now at the top of the industry. This is why some of these actresses, like Gwyneth Paltrow and Angelina Jolie, have never been bold enough to speak up about what has been happening behind the scenes when working with Harvey Weinstein at a young age.

Suspicions

Though sexual assault allegations against Weinstein have been present for more than 20 years, he has been using his power and success to settle them with nondisclosure agreements, threats, and frankly, a lot of money.

The Exposé

However, with the courage of two actresses, Rose McGowan and Ashley Judd, The New York Times releases a detailed investigative article on October 5th about Harvey Weinstein and the severity of his inappropriate actions. The articles state how Weinstein would ask women to massage him in his hotel rooms, watch him take showers, forcibly ask for sexual favors, and touch them without consent (The New York Times).

Reactions

The day the article is released, the media explodes and Weinstein receives heavy criticism. Weinstein hires Lisa Bloom as his lawyer and responds with a statement apologizing for his behavior, but still denies any allegations of sexual assault. Harvey is not the only one who receives great backlash - the public, including her own lawyer mother Gloria Allred, reprimands Bloom for working to advise and defend Weinstein. 2 days later, Bloom resigns.

As dozens of more women come forth with allegations against Harvey Weinstein on the New Yorker and the Guardian, multiple A-list celebrities such as Meryl Streep, Jessica Chastain, Mark Ruffalo, George Clooney, directors (some who were directly associated with Weinstein), and even former president Barack Obama publicly criticize Weinstein’s actions and call for action.

Consequences

Within two weeks since Harvey Weinstein is exposed by major news outlets and social media platforms, Harvey is fired from the Weinstein Company; his wife Georgina Chapman separates from him; The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, BAFTA, and the Producers Guild of America expels him from their committees; USC rejects Weinstein's $5 million donation to the film school and Harvard University takes back the Du Bois medal that was given to him in 2014.

How Did This Happen?

More than 50 women have come forth - since New York Time’s article was released - with accusations against Harvey Weinstein and him making unwanted, forced, sexual advances from the past two decades. Additionally, co-workers and close acquaintances of Weinstein have said that they had known of his actions. Friends of the victims, such as Seth Macfarlane, also reveal that they had knowledge regarding Weinsteins sexual assaults. The fact that it has taken more than two decades for Harvey Weinstein to be exposed and investigated says a great deal about not only Hollywood, but also power and abuse. 

Two decades ago, many of the women who have spoken up today may have looked powerless to Weinstein. Weinstein had a grip over the amount of success these women (and their witnesses) could have in Hollywood. However, these women worked hard to build a strong career and now have a credible platform to speak up about Weinstein without risking their careers. This calls attention to how powerful power really is - without it, you cannot defend yourself and with too much of it, you can become a predator. Weinstein’s abuse of his power in the entertainment industry has ruined more than 50 women’s lives. This poses a question on how Hollywood will be going forth from this to ensure that men in powerful positions do not take advantage of their power and stay in check; more concrete steps need to be taken to ensure that Hollywood does not create films at the expense of sacrificing another woman’s life.

Sources

https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/from-aggressive-overtures-to-sexual-assault-harvey-weinsteins-accusers-tell-their-stories

http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-41594672

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/la-et-mn-harvey-weinstein-timeline-20171012-htmlstory.html

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2017/oct/11/the-allegations-against-harvey-weinstein-what-we-know-so-far

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/18/business/harvey-weinstein.html?mtrref=www.google.com&gwh=C49DD256A4AD73C57C106D2249240A77&gwt=pay

[connihur-blog]

Olympics in Los Angeles

Los Angeles has been officially awarded the 2028 Summer Olympics. Though it seems like an incredible feat, there have been many concerns about finances. Other concerns that I personally have are issues with homelessness and traffic (especially in the USC area if the Coliseum were to be used as the Olympics stage). I think Los Angeles should really try to improve the public transit system as much as it can before we read the year 2028.